Even though I don't hold a lot of value to the opinions of these bloggers (by which I mean, not more than my own opinions), I do think you left out some parts of the quotes.

GarbageTime wrote:

that is arguably one of the better offers made, from a Hornets fan.... and that is only IF both existing PFs decide to leave. Pretty much its "we'll take him off your hands if we have a giant hole to fill and think about giving you a guy with a cool name"

After your quote (see the post) the blogger follows with:

At that point, I would assume Colangelo would laugh and hang up the phone, but that is honestly the best the Hornets could do.

which means he values Bargnani more than the offer they could make. He also said:

Bargnani would not be a horrible fit with Emeka Okafor since he has range that stretches beyond the three point line and at least has the general size that Okafor lacks to make teams shoot over him on the defensive end.

Where you end your Lakers quote:

However, that’s not a very attractive package for the Raptors and if I were in their shoes I’d laugh at a proposal like that.

GarbageTime wrote:

so between Barg's two most comparable peers (Blatche and Frye), fans of both teams have said they have better value.

The Sun's man clearly says that Barngani is better than Frye, but that the Suns have many other needs more important than replacing Frye with Bargnani.

No offense, but it looks a bit like selective quoting.

GarbageTime wrote:

I see no point in, if he can't be moved by the time amnesty needs to be used, not taking advantage of a situation where his contract is off the books and creating more playing time for Amir and Ed. It is not worth the risk not to.

And this is where you differ at least from me in the way you view Bargnani. If I'm right you think along the lines of the win-share theories and see Bargnani as losing us games. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. I don't hold that theory in very high regard, considering the weird outcomes it gives (Ryan Anderson being more valuable than the finals mvp for one). I agree with most top 100 and other lists that have been published this summer that Bargnani is in the low end of the top 100 players in the league. Those lists also show something: even though Bargnani is, as one of these writers wrote "Like Dirk Nowitzki if Dirk wouldn't be any good," he is still in the upper half of the league and no, most teams aren't jumping at the chance to get a nr 80-100 player in the league regardless of whom it is and certainly not someone who doesn't fit everywhere (like I'd imagine Amir would). But lack of a bidding war is different from not having trading value.

I did an in-depth analysis on bargs about half-way through the season last year. I compared his production (stats and advanced stats) versus other PF/C in the league on similar contracts. At that time what I found was that bargs' production was average or slightly below average compared to his salary. Since he makes 1 mil more each year (this year and the three following) I argued that his production needs to improve or his value WILL decline. I thought that if you were going to trade him the best time was at the trade deadline of last year.

I think you can still trade bargs, however, his value has to be seen as declining and as such the longer you hang onto him the less you will get. I wouldn't say that dropping him is addition by subtraction so I wouldn't entertain the idea of using the amnesty on him. even if all get out of him is a high draft pick, that's still better than getting NOTHING and PAYING HIM his entire contract.

I don't think that bargs will improve his production to make his contact more valuable but if you use him in a trade his declining value should get you something, even if that something isn't really very good. I also think that one year with a forward rotation of Amir/Davis/Bargs/+1 is a serviceable front court since we aren't contending or looking to contend this season (if there is one). If we didn't have to pay his salary if we cut him then I would certainly consider it BUT paying him 33-41 million just to go away seems like too high a price.

As an example Metta World Peace + Steve Blake for bargs would work, and they only have 2 years left after this season as compared to bargs' 3. Steve Blake can play our Jose role of backup PG and vet leadership at 60% off. Metta WP would be an upgrade at the 3 for the next two years. IF Metta's crazyiness makes you afraid of the deal I think he is easier to unload (2 yrs @ 8 mil). Whether you think this is a good trade or not, I think it's still better than paying out the entirety of Barg's contract which is at LEAST 33 million.

Does bargs have a bad contract? The perception seems to be yes, and even if it may not be true right now, it probably will be true by the end of next season (if we have one) however, if we cut him with the amnesty, we still have to pay him and we are even thinner in our front court and would have to add least 1 more if not two more players, and pay them as well. I just don't see any argument where cutting bargs is the best option available.

"We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

Soft Euro the point was fans don't put much value in Bargnani or see him as a good fit. If they did, they'd have no issue offering up a fake trade for him.

Does BC value him as higher?.... I've said many, many times I think he does. Which will, I imagine, always be an issue.

which means he values Bargnani more than the offer they could make

no he COULD make a much better offer if he wanted. This is just theoretical evaluating. But they do not. Why? Because they value the players they have more than Bargnani.

The Sun's man clearly says that Barngani is better than Frye,

he also clearly states Frye is better value than Bargnani. Which is EXACTLY what I stated.

There was no selective quoting... I left the link up there for people to read. I also didn't mention fans like Atlanta who said

I desperately hope the Hawks would not trade for Andrea Bargnani.

You can read into it whatever you like, but "Bargnani is not a good fit" and "he has a bad contract" is the most common statements there are.

If I'm right you think along the lines of the win-share theories and see Bargnani as losing us games. Please correct me if I'm wrong here

Not exactly. I think at the rate he is played, being used and being payed he does. Do I think if we remove Bargnani the team will win games? No.. and if they do it will be marginal at best. But do I think if this team trades Bargnani and starts to play other guys will this team win more games in the future? I sure do.

As far as I'm concerned this team is wasting their time and resources. IF amnesty did come to pass this would be a great opportunity to address that.

But lack of a bidding war is different from not having trading value

No where did I say he has no trade value. But I don't think he has the trade value that will bring in a peice greater than the cap space he makes available + playing time he opens up for Ed and Amir. I already stated you try to trade him first, and if nothing is available by the amnesty due date you use it.

None of us obviously have any idea what Bargnani can fetch in a trade. It's all speculation. But the one thing we do know is that it's not the fans that make the trades. What the fans think has no bearing on Bargnani's value. He's a 25 year old 7 footer who can score 20 ppg from inside and out. I think it's safe to say that at least one GM is going to see value in that. Unless we actually get on the phone and pretend to be Colangelo with other GMs, I don't see us knowing what that value is.

None of us obviously have any idea what Bargnani can fetch in a trade. It's all speculation. But the one thing we do know is that it's not the fans that make the trades. What the fans think has no bearing on Bargnani's value. He's a 25 year old 7 footer who can score 20 ppg from inside and out. I think it's safe to say that at least one GM is going to see value in that. Unless we actually get on the phone and pretend to be Colangelo with other GMs, I don't see us knowing what that value is.

Very, very true.

Just look at some of the trades proposed in our own forum (me included) - they are ridiculous.

With that said, I do think Raptor fans (and all home fans) tend to overvalue their own players. Bargnani would be the exception with Raps fans, I think many undervalue him.

Just look at some of the trades proposed in our own forum (me included) - they are ridiculous.

With that said, I do think Raptor fans (and all home fans) tend to overvalue their own players. Bargnani would be the exception with Raps fans, I think many undervalue him.

Fans tend not to look at players objectively. Raptor fans are no different. They live and die with every win and loss and rarely look at the big picture. Many pay to watch the team play, so want their money's worth each and every time. And their feelings about players can change from one game to the next, often based on nothing tangible. Look at many Raptor fans reaction when Valanciunas was selected. I'd say most didn't like the pick, based on nothing except that he is European, so many considered him Bargnani 2.0. Obviously that was a ridiculous comparison and many have changed their mind after actually watching him play.

Fans tend not to look at players objectively. Raptor fans are no different. They live and die with every win and loss and rarely look at the big picture. Many pay to watch the team play, so want their money's worth each and every time. And their feelings about players can change from one game to the next, often based on nothing tangible. Look at many Raptor fans reaction when Valanciunas was selected. I'd say most didn't like the pick, based on nothing except that he is European, so many considered him Bargnani 2.0. Obviously that was a ridiculous comparison and many have changed their mind after actually watching him play.

I watched the draft with buddies. They all freaked out - negatively. I kept telling them he was hands down the best prospect available and thought it was a solid pick. I got ridiculed, mocked, and insulted - mostly in good fun. A few weeks later I got a couple of emails: "Uh, maybe you were right on this."

I watched the draft with buddies. They all freaked out - negatively. I kept telling them he was hands down the best prospect available and thought it was a solid pick. I got ridiculed, mocked, and insulted - mostly in good fun. A few weeks later I got a couple of emails: "Uh, maybe you were right on this."

I was at home alone, but trying to do a couple of other things at the same time. I was thrilled when his name was called and figured, since he was projected to go higher, that most Raptor fans would also be happy. Boy was I wrong. When I looked online at the reaction I was more than a little dumbfounded.

I don't know how you could have been surprised, Tim. Most fans are just ig'nant. I mean, in what other arena in life would anyone possibly think they could run a team better than the pros, outside of sports, based on the miniscule amount of actual knowledge that you can accrue by reading online articles and watching (at max) 40 or so games a year on TV.

I've watched a mechanic work on my car for a half-hour or so through a plate glass window, but I sure as hell don't think I can build a car. And that's a lot simpler task than building a competitive professional sports franchise.

Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

Just look at some of the trades proposed in our own forum (me included) - they are ridiculous.

With that said, I do think Raptor fans (and all home fans) tend to overvalue their own players. Bargnani would be the exception with Raps fans, I think many undervalue him.

Isn't that the question here though. Is it not just as possible that we are overvalung Andrea's value as others may be undervaluing him?

No doubt fans overvalue/undervalue players for a multitude of different reasons... especially players of a fans home team. But doesn't that make what fans of other teams said about Andrea all the more damning?

Isn't that the question here though. Is it not just as possible that we are overvalung Andrea's value as others may be undervaluing him?

No doubt fans overvalue/undervalue players for a multitude of different reasons... especially players of a fans home team. But doesn't that make what fans of other teams said about Andrea all the more damning?

Overall, I don't think so in the case of Bargnani - and that is only my opinion.

No doubt some fans of Bargnani place much more value on him than others. But overall, as a fan base, I think Bargnani is thought less of by Raptor fans than he would elsewhere (a glance through the nearly 4000 replies in Everything Bargnani may help confirm this statement).

With regards to comments from other fans, that is a small sample size with one fan from each franchise and nearly half not responding. However, how many of those fans think Toronto is some hick town in a land of ice? Obviously that is another issue but I do not think there are many fans who have an unbiased view of a player on another team - especially a team that has as small of a following from the US and US media as Toronto. Much like the chats at HoopsWorld.com or ESPN, they are only re-hashing general 'truths' of a player.

At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter what fans think appropriate value is for Bargnani. GM's are the one making the decisions. If I was a GM and had a C or PF like Howard, Bogut, Bynum, Oden (if ever healthy), Noah, Marc Gasol (basically a PF or C who is a great rebounder and good help defender) to pair with Bargnani I would see extreme value in a 25/26 year old 7-footer who can score from anywhere on the floor. Bargnani is a very talented player in the NBA who can do things few other players can do (yada yada yada, all been heard before, I know) but he needs certain pieces around him. Many of the teams that replied were correct in saying they'd have no need for him because they do not have the players to compliment him (Indiana for example), they did not have assets that would appeal to Toronto (Detroit for example) or they already have players better than him (LAL for example).

Bargnani is not a building piece, he is a complementary piece to a team with a front line with strong rebounders and defenders.

The problem in Toronto is it takes time to develop a team to meet the needs of a single player like Bargnani. The Raptors would be better off to trade him to a team that already has the make up to accommodate him. To me this team exists and it is Milwaukee. If I were the GM in Milwaukee I would be calling BC or whoever takes the call on prospective trades. Defensively, everything Toronto and Bargnani needs, Milwaukee has. Offensively, everything Toronto and Bargnani has, Milwaukee needs. The guy from the Pacers' blog summed it up nicely:

The Pacers do need more scoring but I highly doubt they would target Bargnani. Him and Hibbert together would be one of the worst rebounding duos in the league. I think a team that can be successful with Andrea playing the four needs to have defensive-minded, tough, good-rebounder-for-their-position guys at the 3 and 5. Indy isn’t that team, and I think Larry Bird would agree. Indy’s financial woes also make Barg’s salary a huge burden — as I imagine it already is for Toronto and will be for any franchise. – Jared Wade

Clearly this is only my opinion and it differs greatly from the fan in Milwaukee.

For what it’s worth, I’m fairly certain Bargnani wouldn’t have much value to the Bucks. His liabilities as a defender and rebounder handicap him in such a way that Milwaukee wouldn’t feel comfortable playing him without Bogut to protect him. To have a player require something of a babysitter on the court wouldn’t fly with Scott Skiles. – Jeremy Schmidt

My reasoning of why the Bucks would want Bargnani is right there in his reply: Bogut. How much success are Milwaukee going to have without Bogut? They are clearly a better team with Bogut playing. Teaming Bogut with Bargnani would make them even better, in my opinion. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. By this response, Milwaukee will only improve by adding to their strengths (defense and rebounding) and forgetting their weaknesses. Last year they missed the playoffs winning only 35 games yet they had a defensive rating of 4th best in the league and an opponents PPG of 3rd best. Their offense in both rating and PPG were dead last at 30. Milwaukee has the majority of their key players (minus Jennings and Sanders) who are in the prime of their careers. To me adding a player that addresses many of their weaknesses would be a beneficial and desirable move on their part considering they have the pieces already in place to compensate for him. The flip side of the coin is that Bargnani would be a player on the other side of the ball doing the compensation. As we all know though, ultimately, neither opinion, his or mine, is worth jack sheet unfortunately (or fortunately?).

There is no right or wrong answer to a question of his value around the league - it is based on people's opinion who have no bearing on the real situation. The only people who really know value around the league with any credibility are GM's, however, it would always be anonymous due to tampering so the validity of the answers can be called in to question there too.

Overall, I don't think so in the case of Bargnani - and that is only my opinion.

No doubt some fans of Bargnani place much more value on him than others. But overall, as a fan base, I think Bargnani is thought less of by Raptor fans than he would elsewhere (a glance through the nearly 4000 replies in Everything Bargnani may help confirm this statement).

With regards to comments from other fans, that is a small sample size with one fan from each franchise and nearly half not responding. However, how many of those fans think Toronto is some hick town in a land of ice? Obviously that is another issue but I do not think there are many fans who have an unbiased view of a player on another team - especially a team that has as small of a following from the US and US media as Toronto. Much like the chats at HoopsWorld.com or ESPN, they are only re-hashing general 'truths' of a player.

At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter what fans think appropriate value is for Bargnani. GM's are the one making the decisions. If I was a GM and had a C or PF like Howard, Bogut, Bynum, Oden (if ever healthy), Noah, Marc Gasol (basically a PF or C who is a great rebounder and good help defender) to pair with Bargnani I would see extreme value in a 25/26 year old 7-footer who can score from anywhere on the floor. Bargnani is a very talented player in the NBA who can do things few other players can do (yada yada yada, all been heard before, I know) but he needs certain pieces around him. Many of the teams that replied were correct in saying they'd have no need for him because they do not have the players to compliment him (Indiana for example), they did not have assets that would appeal to Toronto (Detroit for example) or they already have players better than him (LAL for example).

Bargnani is not a building piece, he is a complementary piece to a team with a front line with strong rebounders and defenders.

The problem in Toronto is it takes time to develop a team to meet the needs of a single player like Bargnani. The Raptors would be better off to trade him to a team that already has the make up to accommodate him. To me this team exists and it is Milwaukee. If I were the GM in Milwaukee I would be calling BC or whoever takes the call on prospective trades. Defensively, everything Toronto and Bargnani needs, Milwaukee has. Offensively, everything Toronto and Bargnani has, Milwaukee needs. The guy from the Pacers' blog summed it up nicely:

Clearly this is only my opinion and it differs greatly from the fan in Milwaukee.

My reasoning of why the Bucks would want Bargnani is right there in his reply: Bogut. How much success are Milwaukee going to have without Bogut? They are clearly a better team with Bogut playing. Teaming Bogut with Bargnani would make them even better, in my opinion. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. By this response, Milwaukee will only improve by adding to their strengths (defense and rebounding) and forgetting their weaknesses. Last year they missed the playoffs winning only 35 games yet they had a defensive rating of 4th best in the league and an opponents PPG of 3rd best. Their offense in both rating and PPG were dead last at 30. Milwaukee has the majority of their key players (minus Jennings and Sanders) who are in the prime of their careers. To me adding a player that addresses many of their weaknesses would be a beneficial and desirable move on their part considering they have the pieces already in place to compensate for him. The flip side of the coin is that Bargnani would be a player on the other side of the ball doing the compensation. As we all know though, ultimately, neither opinion, his or mine, is worth jack sheet unfortunately (or fortunately?).

There is no right or wrong answer to a question of his value around the league - it is based on people's opinion who have no bearing on the real situation. The only people who really know value around the league with any credibility are GM's, however, it would always be anonymous due to tampering so the validity of the answers can be called in to question there too.

Hold on here.

But overall, as a fan base, I think Bargnani is thought less of by Raptor fans than he would elsewhere

but apparently the 'elsewhere':

many of those fans think Toronto is some hick town in a land of ice? Obviously that is another issue but I do not think there are many fans who have an unbiased view of a player on another team - especially a team that has as small of a following from the US and US media as Toronto

so Raps fans value him less than others would because we as fans are bias.... but those other fans are bias to so the undervalue him aswell?

If I was a GM and had a C or PF like Howard, Bogut, Bynum, Oden (if ever healthy), Noah, Marc Gasol (basically a PF or C who is a great rebounder and good help defender) to pair with Bargnani I would see extreme value in a 25/26 year old 7-footer who can score from anywhere on the floor. Bargnani is a very talented player in the NBA who can do things few other players can do (yada yada yada, all been heard before, I know) but he needs certain pieces around him

So Andrea needs a certain situation, with certain players in order to fit. Not only that but those same teams also, I imagine, would need cap space to make it work and not already have a superior player at his position.

Do you see how this is limiting his "value"? Even then what would those right teams in the right situation have to offer for Andrea? Are they likely to have a young talented player or a high draft pick available? Or are they more likely to have a bad contract and a late first round pick? Is that worth more than opening up cap space and giving AMir and Ed more playing time?

so Raps fans value him less than others would because we as fans are bias.... but those other fans are bias to so the undervalue him aswell?

So Andrea needs a certain situation, with certain players in order to fit. Not only that but those same teams also, I imagine, would need cap space to make it work and not already have a superior player at his position.

Do you see how this is limiting his "value"? Even then what would those right teams in the right situation have to offer for Andrea? Are they likely to have a young talented player or a high draft pick available? Or are they more likely to have a bad contract and a late first round pick? Is that worth more than opening up cap space and giving AMir and Ed more playing time?

I'm sorry if my point was not clear. I thought it was. We'll have to agree to disagree on his value around the league, his value by Raptors fans, and if Bargnani should be used on an amnesty clause.

Garbage, why would you pay him $12M to walk away, when you could trade him for even a second round pick and NOT pay $12M? Think about it man. It just doesn't make fiscal sense to let an asset that you have invested so much time and effort into to just walk away for nothing, when there is ZERO detriment to keeping it around. Let alone PAYING more money to have this asset disappear.

They're NOT going to use the Amnesty on Bargnani. I know this for a fact. I will bet my life on it.
And it will be the right decision.

With the amnesty clause in 2005, teams only had two weeks to decide whether to use the amnesty and who on. After the two weeks the amnesty expired. Holt (and a growing number of other owners according to Stein) is attempting to extend that window and have 2+ years to use the amnesty; with the possibility of that number being up to 5 years.

The argument here is that not every team has a bad contract that they currently want to amnesty. This gives those teams an opportunity to use this clause on a future bad contract.

This type of situation would open up lots of different options. Teams could take a risk on a player that they would not otherwise, with the knowledge that they could get out from under it if things work out very poorly. This could bode well for a player with injury history (Roy, Oden) or a player with some mental instability (Artest, JR Smith).

It could also open up doors for teams to gain assets in a trade. A team could take on a bad contract in a trade in order to gain a few other assets, and then use their amnesty to rid themselves of this contract (Arenas). The amnesty in a way could become a bargaining chip in trades (not in terms of sending it to another team, but in terms of being the only team willing to take someone).

Thoughts? How can you see this type of amnesty clause assisting or hurting the Raptors?

I think the new wrinkle would favor the rich and championship caliber-type teams because they could give an inflated contract to a difference maker knowing full well they will be able to void it at their convenience.

In my opinion, the more complicated the rules and exceptions, the more they favor the rich and powerful organizations.